Case Information
SUPREME COURT OF ARKANSAS No. CV-14-335
Opinion Delivered September 25, 2014 PRO SE APPELLANT’S MOTION TO FRANKLIN L. CHANCE FILE A BELATED REPLY BRIEF APPELLANT [LEE COUNTY CIRCUIT COURT, NO. 39CV-14-22] V. HONORABLE RICHARD L.
RAY HOBBS, DIRECTOR, ARKANSAS PROCTOR, JUDGE DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTION APPEAL DISMISSED; MOTION APPELLEE MOOT.
PER CURIAM
On March 12, 2014, appellant Franklin L. Chance, who is incarcerated at a unit of the Arkansas Department of Correction located in Lee County, filed a pro se petition for writ of habeas corpus in the Lee County Circuit Court. [1] In the petition, he stated that in 2004 he had been convicted of rape and incest and alleged the following: he never gave permission to “dismiss or waive” a jury trial, and, once a trial commences, any attempt by the defendant to waive that trial is untimely; Arkansas Rules of Criminal Procedure 24.3–24.7 were not adhered to; the State and the public defenders allowed perjured testimony to be entered and not challenged when the first witness testified that the medical examination “coming back negative” meant nothing because “I read a magazine article that children heal perfectly.” In support of the allegations, he argued that no magazine article or magazine was put into evidence and “subjected to any form of validity or relevance in violation of Rules of Evidence 402, 403, 703,
and 704,” and that this amounted to prosecutorial and judicial misconduct and denial of effective assistance of counsel. He further contended that the errors and violations of his rights were so numerous and profound as to render the whole legal process a mockery and a farce and that, due to the trial court’s actions, he was “acquitted of all charges,” making his incarceration nothing short of false imprisonment and kidnapping.
The circuit court denied the habeas petition, and appellant lodged an appeal of that order
in this court. Now before us is appellant’s motion for extension of time to file a reply brief. We
dismiss the appeal, and the motion is moot inasmuch as it is clear from the record that appellant
could not prevail on appeal. An appeal of the denial of postconviction relief, including an appeal
from an order that denied a petition for writ of habeas corpus, will not be permitted to go
forward where it is clear that the appeal is without merit.
Davis v. Hobbs
,
A writ of habeas corpus is proper only when a judgment of conviction is invalid on its
face or when a trial court lacked jurisdiction over the cause.
Glaze v. Hobbs
,
The allegations raised by appellant did not call into question the trial court’s jurisdiction.
Jurisdiction is the power of the court to hear and determine the subject matter in controversy.
Bliss v. Hobbs
,
When a petitioner in a habeas proceeding fails to raise a claim within the purview of a
habeas action, the petitioner fails to meet his burden of demonstrating a basis for a writ of
habeas corpus to issue.
Benton v. Hobbs
,
Appeal dismissed; motion moot.
Franklin L. Chance , pro se appellant.
No response.
Notes
[1] As of the date of this opinion, appellant remains incarcerated in Lee County.